Plato – Apology

Original: ὅτι μὲν ὑμεῖς , ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι , πεπόνθατε ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμῶν κατηγόρων , οὐκ οἶδα ·

Translation: That you , O men of Athens , have suffered at the hands of my accusers , I do not know .

Note

This sentence employs a classic 'μεν... δε' (men... de) correlative structure, though the 'δε' clause is omitted here to emphasize the speaker's uncertainty about the audience's experience while implicitly contrasting it with what he *does* know (his own suffering). The vocative address 'ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι' (O men of Athens) is a standard rhetorical device in Athenian public speaking, used to establish a direct connection with the jury and the citizen body. The verb 'πέπονθα' (perfect active of 'πάσχω') is significant; while it can mean 'to suffer' or 'to experience,' in this legal context, it often carries the nuance of enduring a specific hardship or injury. The use of the perfect tense suggests a state resulting from a past action—the jury is currently in a state of having been subjected to the accusations. The preposition 'ὑπό' with the genitive ('ὑπὸ τῶν... κατηγορῶν') explicitly marks the agents of the suffering, highlighting the accusatory nature of the proceedings. The sentence ends with a parenthetical clause ('οὐκ οἶδα') that serves as a hedge, a rhetorical strategy to appear humble and open to correction, thereby disarming potential hostility from the jury.

Original: ἐγὼ δ’ οὖν καὶ αὐτὸς ὑπ’ αὐτῶν ὀλίγου ἐμαυτοῦ ἐπελαθόμην , οὕτω πιθανῶς ἔλεγον .

Translation: I , for my part , then , almost forgot myself because of them , so persuasively were they speaking .

Note

The sentence employs a chiasmus in the structure of the participial and finite verbs, where the subject 'I' is emphasized by the emphatic pronoun 'αὐτός' (autos) attached to the personal pronoun 'ἐγώ' (egō), creating a contrast between the speaker and the accusers ('αὐτῶν'). The use of the imperfect tense 'ἐλεγον' (elegon) for 'were speaking' alongside the aorist 'ἐπελαθόμην' (epelathomēn) for 'forgot' highlights the progressive nature of the persuasion versus the moment of realization. The phrase 'οὕτως πιθανῶς' (houtōs pithanōs) is a powerful adverbial construction meaning 'so persuasively,' which underscores the rhetorical skill of the accusers and the speaker's near-surrender to their argumentation. The sentence also features asyndeton in the second clause, where the causal relationship is implied rather than explicitly stated with a conjunction, adding a sense of immediacy and natural flow to the narrative.

Original: καίτοι ἀληθές γε ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν οὐδὲν εἰρήκασιν .

Translation: And yet , to speak truthfully , they have said nothing at all .

Note

The sentence employs the adverbial phrase 'καίτοι' (and yet / nevertheless) to introduce a concessive transition, contrasting with a preceding argument. The phrase 'ἀληθὲς γ' ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν' is a common idiomatic expression in Classical Greek, functioning as a parenthetical qualifier meaning 'to speak truthfully' or 'strictly speaking.' The particle 'γε' adds emphasis to 'ἀληθές,' while 'ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν' literally means 'as to say a word,' idiomatically signaling that the speaker is using precise or literal language. The verb 'εἴρηκασιν' is a perfect active indicative, third person plural of 'λέγω,' indicating a completed action with present relevance ('they have said'). The object 'οὐδὲν' (nothing) is modified by the adjective 'ἀληθές' (true) in a construction where the adjective predicates the truthfulness of the content of the speech. The syntax reflects a rhetorical style typical of Socratic dialogue, where the speaker dismisses the opposing argument as entirely void of substance.

Original: μάλιστα δὲ αὐτῶν ἓν ἐθαύμασα τῶν πολλῶν ὧν ἐψεύσαντο , τοῦτο ἐν ᾧ ἔλεγον ὡς χρῆν ὑμᾶς εὐλαβεῖσθαι μὴ ὑπ’ ἐμοῦ ἐξαπατηθῆτε ὡς δεινοῦ ὄντος λέγειν .

Translation: Most of all , I was amazed by one of these things which many of them said falsely : that it was necessary for you to be careful lest you be deceived by me as if I were a clever speaker .

Note

This sentence employs the adverb 'μάλιστα' (most of all) to emphasize the intensity of the speaker's amazement at the specific accusation leveled against him. The phrase 'ἐθαύμασα τῶν πολλῶν' (I was amazed by many of them) utilizes a partitive genitive construction, where 'πολλῶν' refers back to the accusers. The relative clause 'ὧν ἐψεύσαντο' (which they said falsely) modifies 'τῶν πολλῶν', highlighting the deceitfulness of the accusers. The core of the sentence is an indirect statement introduced by 'ὡς' (that), containing the impersonal verb 'χρῆν' (it was necessary) with an infinitive 'εὐλαβεῖσθαι' (to be careful). This infinitive takes a subject accusative 'ὑμᾶς' (you) and is followed by a negative purpose clause 'μὴ... ἐξαπατηθῆτε' (lest you be deceived), utilizing the aorist passive subjunctive. The preposition 'ὑπ'' (by) introduces the agent of the deception. Finally, the sentence concludes with a comparative clause introduced by 'ὡς' (as if/just as), featuring the genitive absolute 'δεινοῦ ὄντος λέγειν' (of one being a clever speaker). Here, 'δεινός' carries a dual meaning, often translated as 'clever' or 'powerful' in a rhetorical sense, but also implying 'dangerous' or 'fearful,' reflecting the accusers' attempt to portray Socrates as a dangerous sophist. The syntax creates a layered structure of reported speech and hypothetical comparison, effectively capturing the irony of the situation where the accusers' false claims are presented as the very reason the jury should fear him.

Original: τὸ γὰρ μὴ αἰσχυνθῆναι ὅτι αὐτίκα ὑπ’ ἐμοῦ ἐξελεγχθήσονται ἔργῳ , ἐπειδὰν μη -δ’ ὁπωστιοῦν φαίνωμαι δεινὸς λέγειν , τοῦτό μοι ἔδοξεν αὐτῶν ἀναισχυντότατον εἶναι , εἰ μὴ ἄρα δεινὸν καλοῦσιν οὗτοι λέγειν τὸν τα- τἀληθῆ λέγοντα ·

Translation: For it seemed to me that it would be the most shameful thing for them not to be ashamed that they will be refuted in fact immediately by me , whenever I appear to be in no way clever at speaking , unless indeed these men call 'clever ' the one who speaks the truth .

Note

This sentence employs a complex rhetorical structure characteristic of Socratic dialectic, contrasting societal shame with moral integrity. The phrase 'in fact' (ἔργῳ) paired with 'immediately' (αὐτίκα) emphasizes the concrete and imminent nature of the refutation Plato anticipates. The sentence features a chiasmus in the final clause: the accusative participle 'the one speaking' (τὸν λέγοντα) and the accusative neuter 'the truth' (τὰ ἀληθῆ) frame the definition of 'clever' (δεινόν). The use of the conditional particle 'unless' (εἰ μή) introduces a rhetorical question that challenges the audience's definition of wisdom, a central theme in the Apology. The construction 'it seemed to me' (μοι ἐδόξεν) with the infinitive subject clause highlights the subjective conviction of the speaker regarding the absurdity of the accusers' expectations. The enclitic 'δέ' attached to 'μη' (μηδέ) serves to connect the condition smoothly to the preceding thought, reinforcing the logical flow of the argument.

Original: εἰ μὲν γὰρ τοῦτο λέγουσιν , ὁμολογοίην ἂν ἔγωγε οὐ κατὰ τούτους εἶναι ῥήτωρ .

Translation: For if they say this , I for my part would admit that I am not an orator in the way of these men .

Note

This sentence features a protasis (conditional clause) introduced by εἰ (if) with the particles μέν and γὰρ. The particle μέν here functions to set up a contrast or limitation, while γὰρ provides the causal reasoning ('for'). The main clause utilizes the optative mood (ὁμολογοίην) combined with the particle ἄν to express a potential or hypothetical concession. The emphatic pronoun ἐγώγε (I, at least) highlights the speaker's personal stance against the accusation. The phrase κατὰ τούτους ('according to these men' or 'in the manner of these men') serves as a prepositional phrase modifying the infinitive εἶναι, specifying the standard by which the speaker denies being an orator. The sentence employs a subtle chiasmus in the conceptual structure: the accusers' claim (they say this) is contrasted with the speaker's admission (I would admit I am not). The rhetorical strategy is one of defining terms: Socrates accepts the label of 'orator' only if it refers to the specific, flowery style of his accusers, which he explicitly rejects.

Original: οὗτοι μὲν οὖν , ὥσπερ ἐγὼ λέγω , ἤ τι ἢ οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς εἰρήκασιν , ὑμεῖς δέ μου ἀκούσεσθε πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν — οὐ μέντοι μὰ Δία , ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι , κεκαλλιεπημένους γε λόγους , ὥσπερ οἱ τούτων , ῥήμασί τε καὶ ὀνόμασιν οὐ -δὲ κεκοσμημένους , ἀλλ’ ἀκούσεσθε εἰκῇ λεγόμενα τοῖς ἐπιτυχοῦσιν ὀνόμασιν — πιστεύω γὰρ δίκαια εἶναι ἃ λέγω — καὶ μηδεὶς ὑμῶν προσδοκησάτω ἄλλως ·

Translation: These men , then , as I say , have spoken nothing or almost nothing true ; but you shall hear from me the whole truth — not , by Zeus , O men of Athens , speeches embellished as these men do , or adorned with words and names , but you shall hear things spoken at random with whatever names happen to come to hand — for I believe that what I say is just — let no one of you expect anything else .

Note

This passage features a striking contrast between the polished, artificial rhetoric of Socrates' accusers and his own plain, unadorned speech. The phrase 'μη μα Δία' (not by Zeus) is a solemn oath used to emphasize the sincerity of his denial of rhetorical ornamentation. The syntax employs a chiasmus-like structure in the description of the accusers' speeches: 'κεκαλλιεπημενους ... λογους' (embellished speeches) is contrasted with 'ρημασι τε και ονομασιν ... κεκοσμημενους' (adorned with words and names), where the adjectives modify the nouns in a mirrored fashion. The use of 'εικη' (at random, by chance) highlights the spontaneity and lack of preparation in Socrates' speech, which he presents as a virtue rather than a flaw. The parenthetical clause 'πιστευω γαρ δικαια ειμι λεγω' (for I believe that what I say is just) interrupts the flow to assert the moral validity of his plain speaking. The sentence concludes with a direct command to the jury ('μηδεις υμων προσδοκησατω αλλως') to abandon their expectations of rhetorical flourish, reinforcing the theme of authenticity versus artifice that runs through the Apology.

Original: οὐ -δὲ γὰρ ἂν δήπου πρέποι , ὦ ἄνδρες , τῇδε τῇ ἡλικίᾳ ὥσπερ μειρακίῳ πλάττοντι λόγους εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσιέναι .

Translation: For surely it would not be seemly , O men , for one of this age to enter and fashion speeches for you like a youth .

Note

The sentence employs a rhetorical question structure implied through the negative particle οὐδέ combined with the modal particles γάρ, ἄν, and δέπου to create a forceful assertion of propriety. The vocative 'ὦ ἄνδρες' (O men) directly addresses the jury, establishing a tone of civic engagement and solemnity. The phrase 'ταύτῃ τῇ ἡλικίᾳ' (of this age) refers to Socrates' advanced years, contrasting sharply with the comparative simile 'ὡςπερ μειρακίῳ' (like a youth). This juxtaposition highlights the central theme of the passage: the inappropriateness of an elderly man engaging in the frivolous or rhetorical gymnastics typical of younger men. The verb 'πλάττοντι' (fashioning/molding) suggests the active construction of arguments, while 'εἰσιέναι' (to enter) implies entering the public sphere or the courtroom. The syntax uses a dative of reference ('ταύτῃ τῇ ἡλικίᾳ') to modify the subject of the infinitive clause, emphasizing the age as the defining characteristic of the action. The overall tone is one of dignified self-assertion, rejecting the persona of a youthful orator in favor of the seriousness expected of an older citizen.

Original: καὶ μέντοι καὶ πάνυ , ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι , τοῦτο ὑμῶν δέομαι καὶ παρίεμαι ·

Translation: And yet , and indeed , O men of Athens , I ask and beseech this of you .

Note

The sentence begins with a strong emphasis through the combination of 'kai men to kai' (and yet and indeed), creating a rhetorical intensification common in Socratic apologetics. The vocative 'O men of Athens' (ō andres Athēnaioi) directly addresses the jury, establishing a solemn and personal tone. The verb 'deomai' (I ask, I beg) is followed by 'pariemai' (I beseech, I urge), a hendiadys-like construction that reinforces the urgency of the request. The use of 'touto' (this) as the object refers back to the preceding argument, likely concerning Socrates' refusal to compromise his principles. The sentence employs asyndeton in the final clause, omitting conjunctions between verbs to create a sense of immediacy and emotional weight.

Original: ἐὰν διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν λόγων ἀκούητέ μου ἀπολογουμένου δι’ ὧνπερ εἴωθα λέγειν καὶ ἐν ἀγορᾷ ἐπὶ τῶν τραπεζῶν , ἵνα ὑμῶν πολλοὶ ἀκηκόασι , καὶ ἄλλοθι , μή -τε θαυμάζειν μή -τε θορυβεῖν τούτου ἕνεκα .

Translation: If you should hear me speaking in defense by the same words with which I am accustomed to speak , both in the marketplace and on the benches , so that many of you have heard , and elsewhere , do not be surprised nor make a disturbance on this account .

Note

The sentence employs a conditional clause introduced by ἐὰν (if) followed by the present subjunctive ἀκούητε, a standard construction for a future more vivid condition. The main clause contains a double negative prohibition using μή... μήτε... μήτε..., a common Attic Greek construction for emphatic negation of two coordinated actions. The phrase διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν λόγων (by the same words) emphasizes Socrates' consistency in his defense. The prepositional phrases εἰς τὴν ἀγορὰν καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν τραπεζῶν (in the marketplace and on the benches) allude to his public life and the informal, crowded settings where he frequently engaged in philosophical dialogue. The use of ἵνα (so that) introduces a purpose clause explaining the widespread familiarity the audience has with his style. The sentence ends with a request for restraint, using the infinitives θαυμάζειν (to be surprised) and θορυβεῖν (to make a disturbance), which are governed by the implied imperative 'do not' from the preceding μή... μήτε construction. The phrase τοῦτοῦ ἕνεκα (on this account) serves as a concise causal connector, referring back to the manner of his speech.